Selective enforcement

Published: Tuesday, July 9, 2013 at 08:00 AM.

For that matter, here’s a question for supporters of Obamacare: What prevents a future Republican administration from refusing to enforce sections of the ACA it doesn’t care for?

This is no way to govern. Actors in the economy, from investors and business owners on down to consumers, can’t plan for the future if they have no confidence that the laws say what they mean. And cynicism about government continues to grow, making it harder to accomplish even those things that government can and should do.

The Obama administration’s decisions to postpone implementing parts of the Affordable Car Act illustrates the danger in passing massive, unwieldy, “comprehensive” legislation — and how capricious enforcement of such laws further increases uncertainty in the economy and undermines trust in government.

These are lessons that should apply to the immigration bill currently in Congress.

Last Tuesday, the IRS announced that it will postpone the start date of Obamacare’s “employer mandate” from 2014 to 2015. That spares employers with 50 or more workers from having to provide insurance for their employees.

The administration said it was responding to complaints from business owners. This is something that was known shortly after the president signed the ACA into law in 2010. It’s hard to see how the mandate will become more palatable in 12 months.

By doing so, the administration is ignoring a deadline that is written into the law. That sets a terrible precedent, and further complicates what is already Rube Goldberg piece of legislation.

Without the employer mandate supplying information on employees, the government will have a harder verifying the eligibility of who will receive health insurance subsidies. No problem — it just won’t verify them!

Thus, on Friday the Department of Health and Human Services announced that it would significantly scale back eligibility requirements that new government health insurance exchanges verify consumers’ income and health insurance status. Instead, officials will rely on the honor system — applicants will be trusted to provide accurate information.

Thankfully, we know that there is little evidence of fraud when it comes to receiving government benefits.

This is called “making it up as you go along.”

Like President George W. Bush’s signing statements, it’s an affront to the rule of law. Imagine you decide you are not prepared to pay your taxes this year. Try telling the IRS you will pay them next year. Maybe.

But the feds think they can pick and choose which laws and regulations they wish to enforce. Whatever is most convenient for them, and for politically favored groups.

Which brings us to immigration reform, another 1,000-plus page bill chock full of amendments and minutiae that nobody has fully read nor understood. No one can possibly predict the effect its vast array of incentives and enforcement mechanisms will have.

And now, nor can they trust the government to do what the bill says. For instance, supporters say they have bolstered border enforcement to allay concerns of opponents. But if the bill becomes law, what prevents the administration from delaying, indefinitely, those measures it disagrees with?

For that matter, here’s a question for supporters of Obamacare: What prevents a future Republican administration from refusing to enforce sections of the ACA it doesn’t care for?

This is no way to govern. Actors in the economy, from investors and business owners on down to consumers, can’t plan for the future if they have no confidence that the laws say what they mean. And cynicism about government continues to grow, making it harder to accomplish even those things that government can and should do.